- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:15:29 +0000
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 24/01/12 16:54, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
>
> On 24/01/12 16:52, Gregory Williams wrote:
>> On Jan 24, 2012, at 11:37 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>
>>> This test is wrong - SPARQL has changed to clear the way for RDF 1.1
>>>
>>> DATATYPE("x"@en) is now defined to return rdf:langString so that it
>>> does not change in future when RDF changes.
>>>
>>> (We discussed this and, back then, the advice to the editor was to
>>> fix the result, not have it change as RDf 1.1 came along.)
>>>
>>> This is a reflection of RDF 1.0 vs RDF 1.1. I suggest we remove it.
>>
>> I'd be happy to avoid this issue by having it removed. Are there any
>> other tests that are going to see changed results between RDF 1.0 and
>> 1.1 like this?
For now, I've changed the test to
(IF(lang(?o) = "ja", true, false) AS ?integer)
and updated the results.
Otherwise there would be no test of IF being true/false.
Andy
>>
>
> Not that I've found but this one is a bit different because SPARQL 1.1
> changes to match RDF.
>
> Andy
>
>> .greg
>>
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 17:15:58 UTC